Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T05:35:41.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Downward pointing winglet design and assessment within the M-DAW research project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

J.-L. Hantrais-Gervois ,
R. Grenon ,
A. Mann  and
A. Büscher
J.-L. Hantrais-Gervois
Affiliation:
Jean-Luc.Hantrais-Gervois@onera.fr and Richard.Grenon@onera.fr, ONERA, Meudon, France
R. Grenon
Affiliation:
Jean-Luc.Hantrais-Gervois@onera.fr and Richard.Grenon@onera.fr, ONERA, Meudon, France
A. Mann
Affiliation:
alan.mann@airbus.com, Airbus, Filton, Bristol, UK
A. Büscher
Affiliation:
alexander.buescher@airbus.com, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The design and performance analysis of a wing tip device proposed within the M-DAW project by ONERA is presented. A proto-design process is described and the device was thoroughly assessed (mainly with Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes simulations). The process was further explained through wind-tunnel tests at both low speed and high speed in the pressurised and cryogenic European transonic wind tunnel in Cologne. The device is a downward pointing winglet designed for a retrofit scenario (the wing could be modified only within the 96% – 100% bounds of the span). It was designed to keep the wing root bending moment of the clean wing at cruise unchanged so that the aerodynamic gains are the net gains provided by the device that can be directly installed without structural modifications of the wing.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 113 , Issue 1142 , April 2009 , pp. 221 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Esquieu, S., Méheut, M., Von Geyr, H.F. and Brodersen, O., Far-field drag extraction from numerical solutions and wake surveys, ONERA-DLR Aerospace Symposium, Toulouse, France, October 2006.Google Scholar
2. Kroo, I.M., Drag due to lift: concepts for prediction and reduction, Ann Rev Fluid Mech, 33, 2001, pp 587–617.Google Scholar
3. Bourdin, P., Etude Théorique et Numérique des Effets d’Extrémité de Voilure sur la Traînée Induite, PhD Dissertation, ONERA, France, 2003.Google Scholar
4. Bourdin, P., Influence of wing-tip dihedral and planform on induced drag, World Aviation Congress and Exposition, Seattle, USA, September 2001.Google Scholar
5. Bourdin, P., Planform effects on lift-induced drag, AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Saint Louis, USA, June 2002.Google Scholar
6. Bourdin, P., Numerical predictions of wing-tip effects on lift-induced drag, International Congress of Aeronautical Sciences, Toronto, Canada, September 2002.Google Scholar
7. De Mattos, B.S., Macedo, A.P. and Da Silva Filho, D.H., Considerations about winglet design, AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Orlando, USA, June 2003.Google Scholar
8. Eickmann, K.E., chairman of the committee on assessment of wingtip modifications to increase the fuel efficiency of air force aircraft, National Research Council, 2007.Google Scholar
9. McLean, J.D., Efficient wing tip devices and methods for incorporating such devices into existing wing designs, Patent No US6,886,778 B2, 30 June 2003.Google Scholar
10. Hoisington, Z.C. and Rawdon, B.K., Ground effect wing having a variable sweep winglet, Patent No. US6547181, 29 May 2002.Google Scholar
11. Mann, A. and Elsholz, E., The M-DAW project – investigations in novel wing tip device design, AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, USA, January 2005.Google Scholar
12. Hantrais-Gervois, J.-L. and Rapin, M., Aerodynamic and structural behaviour of a wing equipped with a winglet at cruise, AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, USA, January 2006.Google Scholar
13. Couaillier, V., Adaptation du code SESAME à une approche cell-centered et validation sur un calcul d’aile isolée, ONERA report RTS-40/1285 AY, July 1993.Google Scholar
14. Cambier, L. and Gazaix, M., elsA: an efficient object-oriented solution to CFD complexity, AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, USA, January 2002.Google Scholar
15. Vanderplaats, G.N., Conmin – a fortran program for constrained function minimisation – user’s manual, NASA TMX 62-282, August 1973.Google Scholar
16. Madsen, L.E. and Vanderplaats, G.N., Copes – a fortran control program for engineering synthesis, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, Report NPS69-81-003, 1982.Google Scholar
17. Destarac, D., Far-field/near-field drag balance and applications of drag extraction in CFD, Lecture Series CFD-Based Aircraft Drag Prediction and Reduction 2003-02, Von Karman Institute, Belgium, February 2003.Google Scholar
18. Quest, J., Etw – High quality test performance in cryogenic environment, AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference, paper 2000-2206, Denver, USA, 2000.Google Scholar
19. Germain, E. and Quest, J., The Development and application of optical measurement techniques for high Reynolds number testing in cryogenic environment, AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, paper AIAA 2005-0458, Reno, USA, 2005.Google Scholar
20. Prandtl, L., Theory of lifting surfaces, NACA report TN-9, 1918.Google Scholar
21. Prandtl, L., Theory of lifting surfaces, NACA report TN-10, 1919.Google Scholar
22. Munk, M., The Minimum induced drag of airfoils, NACA report 121, 1923.Google Scholar
23. Lanchester, F.W., Improvements in and relating to aerial machines, Patent No GB189703608, 10 December 1897.Google Scholar
24. Barbaudy, G., Supporting device for aviation, Patent No US994968, filed 4 June 1910.Google Scholar
25. Spiegel, J., Airplane construction, Patent No US1841921, filed 4 December 1929.Google Scholar
26. Zimmerman, C., Slotted airplane wing tip, Patent No US2163655, 2 April 1938.Google Scholar
27. Hugues, C., Cylindrical wing tip with helical slot, Patent No WO02083497, 11 April 2001.Google Scholar
28. Zahm, A.F., Bear, R.M. and Hill, G.C., Lift and drag effects of wing-tip rake, NACA Rept 140, 1922.Google Scholar
29. Herrick, L.L., et al Blunt-leading-edge raked wingtips, Patent No US6089502, 18 July 2000.Google Scholar
30. Smith, S.C. and Kroo, I.M., Computations of induced drag for elliptical and crescent-shaped wing, J Aircr, 1993, 30, (4), pp 446–452.Google Scholar
31. Lundry, J.L. and Lissaman, P.B.S., A Numerical solution for the minimum induced drag of nonplanar wings, J Aircr, 1968, 5, (1), pp 17–21.Google Scholar
32. Whitcomb, R.T., A Design approach and selected wind-tunnel results at high subsonic speeds for wing-tip mounted winglets, NASA report TN D-8260, 1976.Google Scholar
33. Gratzer, L., Blended winglet, Patent No. US5348253, 1 February 1993.Google Scholar
34. Grenon, R. and Bourdin, P., Numerical study of unconventional wing tip devices for lift-induced drag reduction, CEAS Aerospace Aerodynamics Research Conference, Cambridge, UK, June 2002.Google Scholar
35. Heller, G., Kreuzer, P. and Dirmeier, S., Development and integration of a new high performance wingtip device for transonic aircraft, ICAS Congress, 2002.Google Scholar
36. Heller, G., Kreuzer, P. and Maisel, M., Continuous integrated winglet, Patent No. DE10117721, 9 April 2002.Google Scholar
37. Jupp, J.A. and Rees, P.H., Aircraft wing and winglet arrangement, Patent No US4714215, 12 June 1986.Google Scholar
38. Küppers, U., Randwirbelteilung durch aufgefächerte Flügelenden, VDI-Fortschr.-Berichte, 1983, 7, (10).Google Scholar
39. Spillman, J.J., Wing tip sails; Progress to date and future developments, Aeronaut J, 1987, 91, pp 445–453.Google Scholar
40. Laroche, U., Palffy, S., Wing-grid, a novel device for reduction of induced drag on wing, ICAS Congress, Naples, Italy, 1996, pp 2303–2309.Google Scholar
41. Spillman, J.J., Ratcliffe, H.Y. and Mcvitie, A., Flight experiments to evaluate the effects of wing-tip sails on fuel consumption and handling characteristics, Aeronaut J, July 1979, 83, pp 279–281.Google Scholar
42. Patterson, Jr and James, C., Wingtip vortex dissipator for aircraft, Patent No US3984070, 28 May 1974.Google Scholar
43. Schmitt, V. and Hinsinger, R., Advanced transport aircraft aerody-namics in cooperation with Airbus Industrie, La Recherche Aérospatiale, 1996, 4, pp 265–277.Google Scholar
44. Hackett, J.E., Vortex drag reduction by aft-mounted diffusing vanes, ICAS Congress, paper 80-13.4, Munich, Germany, 1980, pp 542–553.Google Scholar
45. Hackett, J.E., Vortex diffuser, Patent No US4190219, 17 May 1977.Google Scholar
46. Gratzer, L., Spiroid-tipped wing, Patent No US5102068, 25 February 1991.Google Scholar
47. Büscher, A., Radespiel, R. and Streit, T., Modelling and design of wing tip devices at various flight conditions using a databased aerody-namic prediction tool, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2006, 10, pp 668–678.Google Scholar
48. Mann, A., Wing tip device, Patent No WO2007031732, 14 September 2005.Google Scholar